*[From the blog “Estimating the Replicability of Psychological Science” by Ulrich Schimmack, posted at *__Replicability-Index__]

__Replicability-Index__]

###### “Over the past years, I have been working on an … approach to estimate the replicability of psychological science. This approach starts with the simple fact that replicabiliity is tightly connected to the statistical power of a study because statistical power determines the long-run probability of producing significant results (Cohen, 1988). Thus, estimating statistical power provides valuable information about replicability.”

###### “In collaboration with Jerry Brunner, I have developed a new method that can estimate mean power for a set of studies that are selected for significance and that vary in effect sizes and samples sizes, which produces heterogeneity in power (Brunner & Schimmack, 2018).”

###### “The input for this method are the actual test statistics of significance tests (e.g., t-tests, F-tests). These test-statistics are first converted into two-tailed p-values and then converted into absolute z-scores. …The histogram of these z-scores, called a z-curve, is then used to fit a finite mixture model to the data that estimates mean power, while taking selection for significance into account.”

###### “For this blog post, I am reporting results based on preliminary results from a large project that extracts focal hypothesis from a broad range of journals that cover all areas of psychology for the years 2010 to 2017.”

###### “The figure below shows the output of the latest version of z-curve. The first finding is that the replicability estimate for all 1,671 focal tests is 56% with a relatively tight confidence interval ranging from 45% to 56%.”

###### “The next finding is that the discovery rate or success rate is 92%, using p < .05 as the criterion. This confirms that psychology journals continue to published results are selected for significance (Sterling, 1959).”

###### “Z-Curve.19.1 also provides an estimate of the size of the file drawer. … The file drawer ratio shows that for every published result, we would expect roughly two unpublished studies with non-significant results.”

###### “Z-Curve.19.1 also provides an estimate of the false positive rate (FDR). … Z-Curve 19.1 … provides an estimate of the FDR that treats studies with very low power as false positives. This broader definition of false positives raises the FDR estimate slightly, but 15% is still a low percentage. Thus, the modest replicability of results in psychological science is mostly due to low statistical power to detect true effects rather than a high number of false positive discoveries.”

###### “This blog post provided the most comprehensive assessment of the replicability of psychological science so far. … replicability is estimated to be slightly above 50%. However, replicability varies across discipline and the replicability of social psychology is below 50%. The fear that most published results are false positives is not supported by the data.”

###### To read more, __click here__.

__click here__
You must be logged in to post a comment.